scholarly journals Notes as a method of legislative technique and their importance for regulation of the institution of conviction record

Author(s):  
Mariya Andreevna Malimonova

The subject of this research is the criminal law provisions on notes as a component of legislative technique and their importance for achieving such goals. The author explores the existing approaches towards the definition of the concept and essence of notes, as well as their classification. Special attention is given to the only note from the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation – note to Article 73, which pertains to the institution of conviction record. The goal of this work is to determine the essence and importance of the note for the development of criminal law norms dedicated to the institution of conviction record. The methodological framework of this research is comprised on the general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison), formal-legal and systematic methods, as well as the relevant case law. As a result, the author formulates the definition of the concept of notes, indicates its correlation with the criminal law norm, lists the basic types of notes used in criminal law, and describes their role. The analysis of the provisions of the Article 73 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the notes to the Article 73 revealed the new problems in legislative regulation of suspended sentence and conviction records, which prompted the author to explore these issues and offer solutions. Clarification is given to the definition of “convicts” provided in the Paragraphs “a” and “a.1” of the Part 1 of the Article 73 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Substantiation is given to the role of convict record as a separate circumstance that prevents imposition of suspended sentence. The author indicates the fact of various interpretation of the concept of “crimes against sexual integrity of minors” mentioned in the note to the Article 73 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and in the construct of the qualifying element for a number of offences of the Article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as substantiates inexpediency of unification of this definition. The scientific novelty consists in proposing the new wording for the purposes of the Article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which the author believes should be enshrined in the new note to the Article 131 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Author(s):  
Artem Aleksandrovich Pastushenko ◽  
Elena Yuryevna Antonova

The subject of this research is the criminal law guarantees for the implementation of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources as an element of ensuring national security of the Russian Federation. The author conducts the assessment of normative and law-enforcement material that determines the legal essence of the indicated principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The article explores case law of implementation of certain norms of criminal legislation of the Russian Federation associated with contravention of the principle of appropriate use of budgetary allocations. This article is first to juxtapose the measures of criminal law protection of the principles of appropriate and targeted spending of budgetary resources. Based on the acquired results, the current position on the absence of penalties for the inappropriate use of budgetary allocations is being disputed. The conducted comparative analysis of the measures of criminal responsibility reveals large disparity with regards to protection of the two key principles of budgetary system of the Russian Federation. The author also established the presence of criminal elements that carry out preclusive function, which narrows down the capabilities of criminal law of the Russian Federation. The article offers an optimal and effective method for eliminating this problem and improving protective capabilities of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, including the tasks of ensuring national security.


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 02016
Author(s):  
Andrey Vyacheslavovich Nikulenko ◽  
Maksim Andreevich Smirnov ◽  
Sulaymon Zarobidin Muzafarov

The article is dedicated to necessary defense as a circumstance preventing a crime in the criminal law of the Russian Federation. Goal: to identify advantages and disadvantages of regulating necessary defense as a circumstance preventing a criminal action as envisaged by Article 37 of the Criminal Code of Russia providing liability for crimes committed through excessive self-defense. Methods: a study of respective norms using a systemic method, general scientific methods (structural-functional analysis, comparison, logical method, content analysis of court practice and mass media). Primary results: the research helped to identify advantages and disadvantages of the legal framework of necessary defense as well as significant qualification mistakes of judicial and investigative practice. Conclusions and novelty of the research: insufficient efficiency of the existing approach to problems of qualifying necessary defense and ways are proposed to solve these problems, namely, by correcting the Decree of the Russian Federation Plenum of Supreme Court dated September 27, 2012, No. 19 On Judicial Use of Legislation on Necessary Defense and Causing Harm in Arrest of Perpetrators. Due to ambiguousness and inconsistent practice of using criminal law norms concerning necessary defense, it is proposed to use, in the further reconstruction of respective norms of Article 37 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a list-based approach to legislative wording of these norms that allow the defender to inflict any harm to the offender. An easily understandable wording is created, which permits lawfully causing harm to social relations protected by criminal law.


Author(s):  
Konstantin V. Korsakov ◽  

This article focuses on the resolution of issues and difficulties legal professionals encounter when qualifying criminal acts under Item e.1 of Part 2 of Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Item e.1). The issues and difficulties appeared when the 1996 Criminal Code entered into force and still exist. They are associated with the absence of a legal definition of blood feud in the text of the Criminal Code and other federal statutes, and also with the fact that Decision No. 1 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, On Judicial Practice in Murder Cases, of 27 January 1999, both in the previous and in the current versions, does not contain any comments and clarifications on the characteristics of Item e.1. The greatest difficulties in investigative and judicial practice appear when determining the subject of the given crime. For a long time, the question of what kind of subject of the crime - general or special - is the subject of the crime envisaged in Item e.1 (formerly Item k of Article 102 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR) continues to be controversial and open in the Russian criminal law theory. The author of the article has made a comprehensive critical analysis of the points of view, opinions, and approaches available in the criminal law doctrine regarding the definition of the type of subject in Item e.1 - murder motivated by blood feud; this has an important qualification value and directly affects the legal assessment of the criminal act provided for in this item. The article presents and examines the doctrinal provisions, court decisions, and norms of criminal law in terms of determining the type of subject of murder motivated by blood feud. The author proposed, explained, and scientifically substantiated a uniform approach to the definition of the subject in Item e.1; this approach can order the Russian law enforcement practice and resolve all the problems. The author also formulated conclusions supported by arguments and reasons. The conclusions confirm the correctness of the scientific and legal approach, according to which the subject of the crime envisaged in Item e.1 is special and should belong to a group of population which cultivates the custom of blood feud.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 277-284
Author(s):  
INESSA PETROVA ◽  
◽  

The article considers some features of the unified state registers that are the subject of a crime under Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, reveals the content of each designated feature of the concept under study, which allowed us to formulate a definition of the unified state registers. The systematization of the unified state registers is given, based on their classification on various grounds. Attention is drawn to the peculiarities of criminal law protection of relations in the field of maintaining unified state registers, for the understanding of which it is necessary to know the regulatory legislation, since the disposition of the criminal law norm provided for in Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is of a blank nature. The study shows that a clear definition of unified state registers allows us to assess from a legal point of view which of them are the subject of a crime under Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which is reflected in the correct qualification of criminal acts that infringe on relations in the field of maintaining unified state registers. The purpose of the study is to clarify the features of criminal law protection of relations in the field of maintaining unified state registers through the prism of understanding some of the characteristic features of unified state registers as the subject of a crime under Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The conducted research allowed us to formulate the author's definition of the unified state registers, to clearly identify the features inherent in the unified state registers, which allows us to give a legal assessment of acts containing signs of a crime under Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The methodological basis of the work is a synergetic approach, implemented through structural analysis and effective synthesis through the study of certain aspects of the criminal law phenomenon under consideration. The practical significance of the work consists in the possibility of distinguishing the attribution of unified state registers to the subject of a crime under Article 2853 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from unified state registers that are not such, which will eventually be reflected in a clear distinction between criminal acts and other illegal ones.


Author(s):  
Svetlana Pavlovna Basalaeva

The subject of this research is the legal relations on corruption prevention in organizations from the perspective of anti-corruption and labor legislation, as well as law enforcement practice. The author employs a general scientific method of dialectical cognition, as well as a number of private scientific methods: technical-legal, system-structural, formal-logical (deduction, induction, determination and divisions of concepts). The article analyzes the four aspects of responsibility of an organization to undertake measures for preventing corruption: 1) circle of measures; 2) form and methods for establishing measures; 3) content of measures; 4) legal consequences of failure to deliver or unacceptable delivery) of the responsibilities for undertaking measures. The author describes the risks of the employer in organization of anti-corruption policy, as well as formulates the proposals on proper discharge of anti-corruption duties by an organizations in accordance with the following aspects: 1) the need to develop and undertake all measures established in the Part 2 of the Article 13.3 of the Law “On Corruption Prevention”; 2) the local normative acts should represent the form of anti-corruption measures; 3) the criterion for establishing anti-corruption responsibilities of the employees relates to their work function and rules of conduct in the organization; 4) proper discharge of responsibilities for undertaking anti-corruption  measures is an essential condition for exemption from liability set by the Article 19.28 of Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.


Author(s):  
Oleg Gribunov ◽  
Gennady Nebratenko ◽  
Evgeny Bezruchko ◽  
Elena Millerova

The authors examine the specific features of criminal law assessment of involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity through the use or the threat of violence. At the beginning, they stress the urgency of counteracting the social phenomenon of prostitution, analyze the very concept of «prostitution», its debatable and problematic aspects, because it is impossible to offer a correct qualification of criminal actions connected with prostitution (crimes under Art. 240 and 241 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) without determining the boundaries of providing sexual services specifically referring to the term «prostitution». It is concluded that the key problem for determining the scope of sexual actions described by the term «prostitution» is the lack of an official definition of this term in Russian legislation as well as a wide variety of services in the modern sex industry. The authors state that the understanding of prostitution as a historical social phenomenon as a situation when a woman provides sexual services to different men by performing sexual acts with them for previously discussed material compensation is outdated and does not reflect the multiple dimensions of modern prostitution. While researching the issues of qualifying criminal acts connected with prostitution and involving the use or the threat of violence within the framework of this article, the authors have analyzed the work of both Russian and foreign scholars and studied examples of investigation and court practice. They examine the problems of legal assessment of criminal law categories «violence» and «the threat of using violence» regarding publically dangerous actions connected with the involvement in prostitution and the organization of this activity. The authors present the criteria of differentiating between corpus delicti where such actions are criminally punishable and other corpus delicti, as well as the cases that require qualification for multiple crimes. The results of this research allowed the authors to work out and present recommendations on qualifying criminal actions connected with prostitution and involving the use of the threat of violence.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 87-92
Author(s):  
E. G. Bykova ◽  
◽  
A. A. Kazakov

The change in the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation led to questions from law enforcement officers about from what moment a person is considered to be held administratively liable and what to mean by the commission of a similar act. The article carries out a systematic legal analysis of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, as well as the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in order to formulate proposals for solving the indicated problems. The fundamental method was dialectical. The formal legal method was used in the study of regulations governing certain aspects of the legal assessment of unlawful acts that take into account administrative precedence. Using a comparative legal method, a distinction was made between situations where a person was ordered to be held administratively liable and an administrative penalty was imposed. Scientific publications on the subject were analyzed. It was concluded that the current version of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, containing a formally indefinite legal category, raises the problem of calculating the one-year period during which a person can be prosecuted under this norm if there is an administrative precedence. In addition, it is justified that a «similar act» should be understood only as an administrative offense, responsibility for which is provided for in Art. 20.3.1 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. The use of criminal law by analogy is unacceptable, therefore, it is proposed to amend the disposition of Part 1 of Art. 282 of the Criminal Code to eliminate the identified gap. The problem identified could be the basis for further scientific research. The practical significance is due to the fact that the positions formulated by the authors can be taken into account in the process of improving criminal law, when amending the relevant explanations of the highest court in this category of cases in order to form a unified practice of applying criminal law.


Author(s):  
Евгения Германовна Ветрова ◽  
Илья Александрович Васильев

В статье проводится сравнение положений ст. 184 УК РФ (Оказание противоправного влияния на результат официального спортивного соревнования) и соответствующих статей Дисциплинарного Регламента Федерации Хоккея России. Автор произвел сравнение составов анализируемых правонарушений: объекта, субъекта, объективной стороны и субъективной стороны и указал их сходства и отличия. The article compares the provisions of Article 184 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Illegal influence on the result of an official sports competition) and the corresponding articles of the Disciplinary Regulations of the Russian Ice Hockey Federation. The author compared the components of the analyzed offenses: the object, the subject, the objective side and the subjective side, and indicated their similarities and differences.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 129-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Назаренко ◽  
Gennadiy Nazarenko

In the article anti-corruption policy is considered in criminal law and in the preventive aspects. The definition of anti-corruption policy by legal means is given. It is shown that the most significant and effective tool in this direction (kind) of policy is the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, the preventive potential of criminal law is not enough. The law does not cover a lot of corruption manifestations, which are involved in the use of any official status, its authority and opportunities. Up to the present time criminal law is not given with the accordance of the Federal Law «On combating corruption» from 25.12..2008 №273-FZ (as amended on 22.12.2014). Criminal law measures applied to corrupt officials, have palliative nature: they are based on the concept of limited use of criminal law and mitigation of punishment. The author makes a reasonable conclusion that more effective implementation of anti-corruption policy requires the adoption of new criminal law which contains the Chapter on corruption crimes, sanctions of which must include imprisonment as punishment as well as confiscation of property or life deprivation of the right to occupy certain positions or to be engaged in certain activities.


Author(s):  
Алена Харламова ◽  
Alena Kharlamova ◽  
Юлия Белик ◽  
Yuliya Belik

The article is devoted to the problematic theoretical and practical issues of the content of the signs of the object of the crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code. The authors determined the main direct object, revealed the essence of the right of ownership, use and disposal. Marked social relations that can act as an optional direct object. Particular attention is paid in the article to the subject of the crime. Attempts have been made to establish criteria that are crucial for the recognition of any vehicle as the subject of theft. The content of the terms “automobile” and “other vehicle” is disclosed. The analysis of the conformity of the literal interpretation of the criminal law to the interpretation of the law enforcer is carried out. It is summarized that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation narrows the meaning of the term “other vehicle”, including in it only vehicles for the management of which, in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, is granted a special right. The authors provide a list of such vehicles and formulate a conclusion on the advisability of specifying them as the subject of a crime. The narration of the article is accompanied by examples of decisions of courts of various instances in cases of crimes under Art. 166 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document